LUC vs Shockers

[Ricardo del Rio]

Does Evansville become a trap game?

you better not lose to Evansville before coming to INS!

[Bradleyfan1]

Does Evansville become a trap game?

you better not lose to Evansville before coming to INS!

Or not win in St Louis.


Or bust out before sweet 16 .

[LU Rambler12]

[/quote]

What you've missed by being new to the party is that our neutral court opponents say the same thing. It's what we heard all the way through the NCAA's from both the opposing teams and from the media.

We just got lucky because Pitt, Gonzaga, LaSalle, and Ohio State all had "unlucky", bad shooting nights against us.

The supposed fact that 4 consecutive teams had off-shooting nights is being used to diminish WSU's F4 finish - even though Kenpom says WSU had the toughest route to the F4 in the last 11 years. Lots of teams get "unlucky" shooting against the Shox.[/quote]

I'm not trying to diminish any of the the success that the Shox have had. Clearly, you guys have a very good team and I'm certain that you'll go far in the Dance. All I'm saying is that this game could have been a lot closer. I conceded that some of our poor play was due to the Shocker defense (obviously), but when we shoot 50% from the FT line...then that is frustrating for us Rambler fans.

Also, some of the complaints that the Shocker fans had about your team tonight parallel the complaints of nearly every other team we have played this year, probably because we are better than most people anticipate and most of those people don't really like to give us some credit for their teams' woes.

[rlh04d]

Because it's probably true. I think a lot of it is psychological. The Roundhouse is a tough place to play in. Add to it the fact that the Shox are one of the top teams in the country your opponents start beating themselves.

It goes without saying that the Shox are the better team, but we had a terrible first half and missed a lot of easy baskets. This game could have been a lot closer.

That said...I look forward to seeing you guys in Chicago. I think tonight's game may have given our guys a little bit of confidence, which, for a young team like ours, goes a long way.

I certainly understand the psychological edge of the Roundhouse, but our NCAA opponents were saying it, every team we play on the road says it, etc. The only teams that ever shoot above their average against us are Creighton and teams we don't bring our real defense against.

I do think Loyola's play was more mental than forced by WSU, though. We didn't play good defense in the game, and we rested the starters way too much in the first half. Loyola isn't bad enough to score 18 in the first half with the quantity of minutes we were giving to backups.

[rlh04d]

I'm not trying to diminish any of the the success that the Shox have had. Clearly, you guys have a very good team and I'm certain that you'll go far in the Dance. All I'm saying is that this game could have been a lot closer. I conceded that some of our poor play was due to the Shocker defense (obviously), but when we shoot 50% from the FT line...then that is frustrating for us Rambler fans.

Also, some of the complaints that the Shocker fans had about your team tonight parallel the complaints of nearly every other team we have played this year, probably because we are better than most people anticipate and most of those people don't really like to give us some credit for their teams' woes.

It could have been.

However, I think you (and others on the Rambler forum) are also ignoring the quantity of minutes given to WSU backups, capped off with a walk-on 5'7" guard playing in the first half.

The game could have been a lot closer if Loyola was playing better/without nerves. The game could have been a lot more out of hand if Marshall hadn't subbed in backups early and often, clearly having no respect for Loyola (that was the first time a walk-on has played in the first half this year).

I think it's a mix of both. But if Loyola was shooting better, the entire season to this point says that WSU likely would have played a lot better as well. It was the lack of competition and lack of respect shown to Loyola by Coach Marshall (which I mentioned before halftime) that left WSU so lethargic.

Both teams could have played a lot better. I don't think either team's fans can look at just the one side and say "what if we played better," because it doesn't take into account how the other team would have responded. And WSU especially, through the previous 21 games, has responded very well to being challenged.

[Aargh]

How much of the final margin of victory was attributable to the difference in talent between the teams? And how much was attributable to the observable differences in the first half and the Shox really not caring in the second half?

[Brot4britu]

Brot says--If Shockers played "not caring" this evening--well then trouble is on the horizon--no pun. This Loyola fan has said the Shockers will go all the way to be Nat'l Champs. IF and I say IF LUC had a better first half, there would have been BIG trouble. LUC is NOT chopped liver--I believe WSU and their Coaches found that out-

Only thing wrong with WSU is their choice of game announcers.

Ramblers are here to stay--Get used to it. BUT for now the Shockers are the best.

[AndShock]

I might be forgetting a game or two, but I believe this Loyola game was the first time this season where the game was pretty well in hand at halftime. We've seen what happens when the Shocks are in trouble or battling at the half, maybe this is what happens when we're dominating at half.

[rlh04d]

Brot says--If Shockers played "not caring" this evening--well then trouble is on the horizon--no pun. This Loyola fan has said the Shockers will go all the way to be Nat'l Champs. IF and I say IF LUC had a better first half, there would have been BIG trouble. LUC is NOT chopped liver--I believe WSU and their Coaches found that out-

Meh. The reason WSU is in the position they're in right now is that the main four are incredible competitors. They respond to being challenged.

If Loyola had a better first half, WSU would have had a better second half.

And if Loyola had a better first half, Wessel and Wiggins wouldn't have played half of it, and a walk-on wouldn't have been playing. And the entire starting lineup except Cotton wouldn't have been sitting with 15 minutes to go.

WSU pulled up the reigns too early and couldn't get restarted. Loyola played much better in the second half, but that first half was the easiest WSU has had this season, probably since Emporia.

Maybe that counts as a new strategy to use against WSU. Either be beating them by 19+ at the half, or be losing by that much to lull them to sleep.

[Haha]

Shut up!

-It's a long azz season, there will be closer games than this, glad WSU finished on the winning side of it, that's all that matters to me.

-Good game Loyola, hope you keep improving, looking good!

See how easy that was? Some of you, on both sides, are quite the little b******!